This is my biggest pet peeve for the democrats - they will not even talk about reforming the entitlement programs that everyone knows are on an unsustainable path. These things, Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid are the largest spending areas in the budget; the trustees, OMB, CBO, everybody says they are growing too large relative to GDP. We simply cannot afford to continue the status quo, and yet for political reasons the democrats adamantly refuse to make any changes. The republicans have at least put forward the Ryan Plan to address the issue; the democrats have done nothing.

This is not the leadership we should be getting from Washington. Problems should be faced and addressed by both sides, deals worked out and compromises made, regardless of the political costs. I wouldn't say the Republicans are blameless in this, and we do have a major difference of opinion over which way to go: gov't centered vs private business. Pretty hard to work out an agreement when each side is diametrically opposed to the other in terms of ideology. In such times, I think you go with what the public wants, both in terms of desired policies and payfors. I would like to see the next president lay it all out to the American people in an unbiased manner - here's the deal, these are the choices, and here's how we can pay for it. Then he should sit down with the leaders in Congress and strike a deal, however onerous it might be to either side or both sides. I don't want somebody trying to sell me on what he wants, like a used car salesman trying to unload a lemon. I want the truth with no spin.

In my view it is the democrats who are the most intransigent; they are showing a total unwillingness to offer a plan to deal with these issues. It is political cowardice and a lack of leadership from the top people in their party. I think Obama could've had a deal over the debt ceiling last summer, but he tried to change it to be more in his favor at the end and it all fell apart. A president is supposed to get things done with the opposition party, and he didn't do it.

Granny hopin' if dey raise the debt ceiling, she'll get her 2nd stimulus check...Understanding the Scope of the US Debt Ceiling December 05, 2012 WASHINGTON  No discussion on the fiscal cliff would be complete without first taking a look at the U.S. debt. But for many - talk of U.S. debt and the debt ceiling is often abstract because it lacks scale.

It's not some architectural feature unique to Washington. The debt ceiling is a borrowing limit - passed by Congress in 1917 to fund the war effort. Back then, the ceiling was slightly more than $11 billion. Economist Richard Rahn, a senior fellow at the CATO Institute, said the idea was to enforce discipline on government spending. "It's really redundant when you have a budget, but ironically it has turned out to be somewhat useful because it forces the debate occasionally about how much we're spending and how we're spending," he said. Until recently, Congress routinely approved higher limits. But that changed in 2011 when a Republican-led Congress stalled on extending the ceiling, resulting in the first ratings downgrade of U.S. debt.

Today the ceiling is $16.4 trillion - a limit the U.S. is likely to exceed by February. "I think it's beyond the human mind to be able to grasp numbers that big," said Rahn. Just how big is the U.S. debt? It's easier to visualize if we start with a hundred dollars. A hundred of these makes ten thousand. If we multiply that ten thousand by one hundred - now you have a million dollars. Enough to fit in a shopping bag. A hundred million - looks more impressive - shown here on top of a shipping pallet. Make that 10 pallets - and you have a billion. But now it gets interesting. Multiply these 10 pallets - one thousand times and you have a trillion - one, followed by 12 zeroes. Enough money to cover an entire soccer field - two pallets high.

So to imagine the size of the U.S. debt - multiply that double-stacked football field 16 times. "We owe money to everybody. Of course foreigners have about 40 percent of our federal debt, not Americans. The biggest single holder are the Chinese," said Rahn. Japan also owns a sizeable amount, as does Europe, along with private investors around the world. Many conservative politicians want to cut the debt sharply, and some say the debt limit should not be raised without more spending cuts. The Congressional Budget Office said the so-called fiscal cliff - automatic tax increases on January 1, along with spending cuts mandated by Congress to force negotiations on the debt ceiling - would cut next year's deficit in half.

But doing so all at once poses serious risks, said fiscal responsibility advocate, Robert Bixby. "Theyve been pretty clear, the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office, that if we go over the fiscal cliff, their projection is that it would cause a recession and Ive seen private sector forecasts that are even more adamant," said Bixby. Some in Congress would like to see a higher debt ceiling as part of negotiations. For now, many economists say avoiding the shock that could come from higher taxes and government cutbacks is far more critical to the world's largest economy. Experts say any missteps could have big ramifications domestically and abroad, just when the global recovery appears to be losing momentum.

Debt Limit Should Be Off the TableDecember 5, 2012  The House Democratic leadership said Wednesday that the debt ceiling ought not be a negotiating item in Congress, thereby ceding their constitutional authority to borrow money to President Barack Obama.

The debt limit ought not to be held hostage to anything, said Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) during a press conference on Capitol Hill. It hurt our economy. We were downgraded for the first time in my career, and I think in history, by one of the rating agencies. The credit worthiness of America ought not to be put at risk, he said. It ought not to be a negotiating item. The current debt limit stands at $16.394 trillion, which the Treasury Department expects to be met before the end of the year. As of the close of business Monday, the public debt reached $16.338 trillion, leaving less than $60 billion before the ceiling is met.

In the fiscal cliff negotiations, President Obama asked for the power to permanently and unilaterally lift the debt limit without the approval of Congress. First of all of course the president wants it part of the agreement so that we do not harm the economy, harm the creation of jobs and harm working Americans and Americas credit worthiness by making that part of the debate, Hoyer said. It ought not be part of the debate.

Hoyer agrees with the presidents proposal that would give him permanent unilateral authority to raise the debt ceiling unless overridden by two-thirds of the Congress, which he offered via Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner in fiscal cliff negotiations with House and Senate leaders last week. I think the president is absolutely right, Hoyer said in a pen and pad briefing on Friday. We ought not to play this game of debt limit extension. Both parties have been responsible and participated in this game. When the other party was in charge, whether it was a Democratic Party or a Republican Party, with the other party in charge of the White House we tended to demagogue on the debt limit, Hoyer said. I think that's unfortunate. President Obama is saying we ought to stop playing that, because it hurt our economy very substantially when we did so in the summer of 2011, he said.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi also endorsed the presidents plan last week saying the debt limit should be out of the hands of Congress. The Constitution expressly gives the power to borrow money to Congress  not the president. Article 1, Section 8, Clause 2 says: "Congress shall have power ... To borrow money on the credit of the United States." The debt ceiling was last raised on Aug. 2, 2011 when Congress and the president agreed to the Budget Control Act, which increased the borrowing limit by $2.4 trillion, and set in motion $1.2 trillion in automatic cuts to defense and discretionary spending. Standard and Poors downgraded the U.S. credit rating just three days later on Aug. 5 from AAA to AA+, saying that the legislation falls short of what, in our view, would be necessary to stabilize the government's medium-term debt dynamics. Prior to the downgrade, John Chambers, chairman of S&P's sovereign ratings committee, said $4 trillion in deficit reduction over 10 years would be a good start and "would signal the seriousness of policymakers to address the fiscal position of the United States."

These elected officials are taken care of for life at our expense. They don't pay in SS so see no reason to fix it or the other entitlements. We taxpayers will continue to pay and they will continue to spend.

They will keep going as they are till the whole thing collapses and they are forced to act.

Useful Searches

About USMessageBoard.com

USMessageBoard.com was founded in 2003 with the intent of allowing all voices to be heard. With a wildly diverse community from all sides of the political spectrum, USMessageBoard.com continues to build on that tradition. We welcome everyone despite political and/or religious beliefs, and we continue to encourage the right to free speech.

Come on in and join the discussion. Thank you for stopping by USMessageBoard.com!